[Stephen Tu]

---

Matchpoints.

1.Make a slam try here?
FWIW your methods can find out if partner has 3 or 4 cd spade support, and whether he has a red stiff/void, but not if he is min or max.


2. Say you make a GF inquiry, and partner bids 4♣, showing 4 cd spades and no shortness. If you bid 4♦, partner bids 4♥. Is it now worth risking the 5 level, what's your plan? Do you have better methods that can get you to slam opposite AJxx Axx xxx Axx or Axxx Axx xx Axxx or Axxx Ax xxx AQxx or Qxxx Axx Kx Axxx but not opposite AJxx Ax xxx Axxx or AJxx Axx xx QJTx?

[mike777]

3d no problem yet

agree hard to stop short of slam

[gnasher]

I'd make the game-forcing enquiry, then bid 4♠ after 4♥. I'm not so worried about finding a doubleton heart opposite, which is not that likely and impossible to diagnose at this point. The biggest concerns are:
- Reaching the five-level opposite some quacky minimum like AQxx Axx Qxx xxx or QJxx Axx Qxx QJx.
- Reaching slam opposite three aces and having only eleven tricks.
- Reaching slam opposite a hand like Stephen suggested, where we're missing ♣A ace and they set up a diamond trick at trick one.

Hence I make a slam try and then sign off, to allow partner to evaluate his hand. He'll tend to look favourably on controls, extra values, a doubleton diamond, high cards in his second suit, etc. Unfortunately he may also think ♠Q is a good card when it's not, and he might think ♥Ax is a ruffing value. Some of the time partner will drive to a poor slam.


In one partnership I could bid
1♣ (clubs or bal) - 1♥ (spades)
2♠ (four) - 2NT (FG enquiry)

then with a balanced hand opener would show his second suit at the three-level, or 3♠ with 4333. This wouldn't help me to distinguish ♥Ax ♦xxx from ♥Axx ♦xx, but that's mainly because we haven't bothered to discuss continuations - there's plenty of room for finding out about shape, strength and suitability.

[MrAce]

I am bidding 4♠. My first goal is to make as many tricks as i can in 4♠ rather than torturing my pd with weird slam invitations that does not even warrant success even if he holds a no brainer slam accept hand.
It makes huge difference to let your opponents know all the bids between 2♠ and 4♠ when you investigate. Forget about letting them know your problem suits, just the fact that you are interested in slam can make a huge difference in their lead and defense. If you are playing in a good field, believe me, your opponents will use each and every single bid you made against you.

Think about this way, auction went

1♣--1♠
2♠--4♠

Defenders do not know whether you are in a borderline game or not. After the lead they still will not know since your hand is hidden. I would never give up this advantage for an ambiguous slam try, which may not even bring much more matchpoints than bidding 4 and making 6.

[Cyberyeti]

I'm certainly investigating, the heart cue is actually in some ways bad news (it removes Axxx, xx, xx, AQxxx/AQJx type hands), I think I take the chance that partner only has 2 hearts if he has 3 aces. There is no guarantee of a diamond lead even where it beats the contract, the lead through dummy's ♥ cue might be more attractive with some diamond holdings (or a small doubleton trump).

[wanoff]

I'd investigate the ♦ shortage and if not present give up.

[rmnka447]

3 ♦ next.

I think you have to at least investigate slam with this hand. Give partner as little as 2 keys and a useful queen and slam may play very well. You have controls in all the suits. As long as partner opens decent hands, there's a fairly good chance that at least 2 keys are held. Slam then comes down to the suit holdings to insure no second loser exists. That pushes you toward cueing rather than just using a RCKB variant.

One concern would be potential ♦ losers if in slam. So I think the next step is to make a game try in ♦, then decide what to do next based on partner's response.